Tuesday, March 15, 2011

The List Experiment Update

It has now been that price for a month. So I'm raising the price back up to $2.99. The price change should take effect sometime tonight.

The List peaked as high as #15 on the Kindle bestseller list. It is currently at #23, and selling more than 1500 copies a day. In the 28 days it was 99 cents, it sold about 20,300 copies. It took 9 days to reach the Kindle Top 100, and has been there 20 days. Each copy sold has earned me 35 cents.

The total I earned during the 99 cent experiment was roughly $7100.

Now we'll see how long The List can stay on the Top 100, and how much I'll make in the next 28 days.

When The List hit the Top 100, I lowered the price of Shot of Tequila to 99 cents. It went from a rank of about #2400 to a rank of about #600. It turned out I was earning about the same at both ranks, so I went back to $2.99 a few days ago, and dropped the price on Disturb. Disturb was ranked around #1200. Now it's ranked at #251.

I dunno if Disturb can crack the Top 100 or not. If it doesn't by the time The List drops to #90, then I'll put it back to $2.99 and drop the price on another, better-selling ebook. I believe Origin, Endurance, or Trapped could hit the Top 100 at 99 cents.

The concept of putting items on sale has served retailers well. I'm thinking that my new sales strategy will always have one or two novels at 99 cents, and then rotate the titles monthly.

It should be fun to watch what happens for the rest of March. If The List sells 500 copies a day at $2.99 for the next seven days, I'm make as much as I did in the previous twenty-nine.

Fascinating data. Thanks for being so generous and transparent with your processes and experiments.

Question: if you were starting fresh, would you launch your first book at $0.99 or $2.99? I can see arguments being made for either choice. (Incidentally, I've read your blog back through December and don't think I've seen this specifically addressed--if I missed it, apologies!)

Nice experiment, Joe. The List may have some “legs” from the 99 cent recent sale though—people recommending it to friends, and such. So, it may not be the same as listing it independently at 99 cents.

Comment—if you do may the same selling a gazillion copies at 99 cents as you do at selling just a shitload of copies at $2.99, maybe your thought on your other blog post might be right – the sweet spot for sales and profits might be $1.99. Good luck to you, man.

P.S. I know many thing Negra Modelo is shitwater, but I really love it. Try it sometime.

Joe, you are too modest. When I checked at 2 pm Tuesday afternoon, Amazon definitely had "The List" ranked #13 on the Kindle list, not #15. (At the same time, Stephen Carpenter's "Killer" stood at #12; John Locke held 4 spots in the Top Ten, including #1 and #2; and Amanda Hocking had 3 in the Top Twenty. That was nine indie titles in the Top 20. Amazing.)

As someone racing to finish and publish my first thriller very soon, I'm grateful to you for your willingness to share your success and wisdom. Largely because of your blog and Robin Sullivan's, I've finally become motivated to make the big jump from nonfiction to fiction -- something I had always dreamed of doing. It took the examples of pioneering indie authors like you to show me that my efforts would not have to face the torture and near-certain futility of running the Gatekeeper Gauntlet.

It appears that there is considerable downward price point pressure being applied by the reading market. Story after story gets told on Joe's blog and others, and on the forums, about how sales skyrocket after drastic price reductions. Joe's experimentation is revealing. Very cool -- balancing price point and demand. Is anyone doing formal research on this--acquiring and crunching data?

Will the shakeout be a business model that ultimately is based on free product while driving other revenue streams as a result? Remember the Grateful Dead, they pioneered "freemium" product -- essentially giving away the recorded music (even letting fans freely record the live concerts), while making a killing on ticket sales, merchandise sales and other revenue sources. And this was before the Internet.

So...will eBooks pricing be inexorably driven downward, forcing authors to find alternate revenue streams to be competitive and to ring the cash register while meeting the demand for free, or virtually free product?

We may be seeing the evolution of the TV business in reverse -- going from a completely paid model to a fully advertiser/sponsor supported model. There may be other revenue models we haven't even seen yet (placing another author's book promotion for cash in the back of your own Kindle book, a form of co-promotional sponsorship, is only the beginning). Any ideas?

I've also wondered if it might come to a model of free books paid by advertisers. But I hope not. Because I think one always ends up writing for the people who pay you. Writers under the old system wrote to please publishers; finally we had a shot at writing to please readers. I'd hate to go to writing to please advertisers.

I don't see a lot of writers being able to make money on fan products, and most probably would rather be writing than hawking T-shirts or whatever (the big exception being the people who publish books basically as a marketing tool to drive sales of seminars or diet products or the like). So I think that's going to limit the willingness of most authors to offer books for free. The "rush to the bottom" is happening because the bottom (or at least the $.99-$2.99 price range) is turning out to be reasonably profitable for writers.

@Mary"I don't see a lot of writers being able to make money on fan products, and most probably would rather be writing than hawking T-shirts or whatever"

Agreed, I would rather my authors focused on writing more books. The Grateful Dead example is more of an indicator from history how innovation in entertainment marketing and business models can take on new forms.

It may be that, at least for now, sponsored eBooks will be of the corporately-created ala Kraft Foods (cooking with Philadelphia cream cheese).

Still, I'm curious to know if anyone is doing some quantifiable research on price sensitivity in the marketplace and optimal pricing strategies.

even climbing mountains, where"straight up" is the desired path,you occasionally have to jog off.

and climbing a bestseller list isway more complicated, becauseyou are interacting with _many_books in your direct vicinity thatexert influence on any progress.

because the bestseller list _is_a zero-sum game, by definition.

"tequila" climbed to the top-500,where it started being buffeted,but it was under two weeks intoits journey from #1500/#2000so that shoulda been expected...

especially since all the attentionwas still focused on "the list"...

why did joe bail? good question.

***

glenn mccreedy said:> Will the shakeout be > a business model that > ultimately is based on > free product while driving > other revenue streams > as a result?

um, no.

there will be lots of free e-booksdown the line... heck, there arelots of free e-books right now...

but the answer to "monetizing"the internet is to capture a very_small_ amount of money froma very _big_ number of people.

that is what is happening here...it's a miracle gift from amazon...

let the price of a book fall to $1.so you can make a million bucksby selling it to a million people.or $350,000 as the case may be.

but unless you don't care aboutmaking money, don't go to free.

but do sell copies to the library,so any folks who need to read itfor free have an option for that.

-bowerbird

p.s. it's ok to not care aboutmaking money. it ain't a sin.

p.p.s. even better is an artistsaying "my art is a _gift_ to you,but sure, i need money to live,so if you wanna give me _back_ a gift of money, i'd be happy toget that from you, with thanks."because _those_ are the artistswho'll create tomorrow's world;you cannot usurp their power...they will be the guerilla artists.

There are similarities here to the stock photography business. Four - five years back, it was still possible for a photographer to make good money from his/her stock images - earning perhaps $500 - $1500 per 'use' of an image. Some photographers were earning $100k per quarter or more. Stock was their pension fund.

Then digital photography grew and grew, and microstock came along. The stock image market was flooded - not necessarily with good quality photography - and the price dropped to $1 - $5 per image use. There are lots of possible urban myths about how much money microstock photographers made. No revelations like Joe and others, with verifiable numbers sold, etc.

There is no myth regarding the very significant negative impact on the stock image companies and photographers resulting from microstock impact. Profits and income have sunk remarkably.

Kinda like the impact that ebooks will have on the traditional publishers - with the indies the equivalent of the microsotock photographers.

Like microstock - we are seeing inadequate plotting, lack of editing, bad formatting [even John Locke's books in Kindle are badly formatted] - similar flags to the lack of quality in microstock. And of course the occasional gems are released.

However, while some of us may like to eat out at a good restaurant, lots of people like MacDonalds and other fast food outlets.

Ebooks are there - some are fast food. Some lack quality. Some may be better quality. It will be an interesting ride.

Dollars earned for whom? If you are counting gross-dollar sales, maybe the the TradPubs outweigh the indies. But if you consider net to the author, a $2.99 indie eBook earns the author more than a $12.99 trade paperback.

It appears that there is considerable downward price point pressure being applied by the reading market.

I don't know...I see a few people clamoring on blogs and such for everything to be .99. But, as noted elsewhere, we also see e-books selling well for more--sometimes much more--than that.

As for my own stuff, it may be too small a sample right now, but my most expensive book (LAWYERS GUNS AND MONEY, 2.99) is selling slightly better than my least expensive (THE DEVIL'S RIGHT HAND, my first backlist title, for .99). I just released GOOD DAY IN HELL, the second book off my backlist, for 1.99. We'll see what happens.

About a year ago I surveyed newspapers and found only about 75 that still produce their own book reviews. I did not find any that would consider a "vanity" book, which is how they still view indie pubs and self pubs, which is also another demonstration of how editors are mired in attitudes of the 19th century and also why most news(papers) are slowly sinking into a tar pit of oblivion.I did not ask, when talking with the few remaining "book editor" types I found, how they handle ebooks.There may be an issue that they don't get them for free or know how to handle them (no Kindle, techno-phobic, they are old fashioned or just snobs...).With regard to reviewing books, their logic seems to be that traditional publishers edit, check facts and spelling and screen for quality.Duh.

@ Robert Bidinotto said... Largely because of your blog and Robin Sullivan's, I've finally become motivated to make the big jump from nonfiction to fiction -- something I had always dreamed of doing. It took the examples of pioneering indie authors like you to show me that my efforts would not have to face the torture and near-certain futility of running the Gatekeeper Gauntlet.

Thanks for the shout out Robert. Joe and I sometimes come from slightly different perspectives but we both believe 100% in self-publishing as a means to success. I'm glad you've found my posts useful.

Tara Maya said... I've also wondered if it might come to a model of free books paid by advertisers. But I hope not. Because I think one always ends up writing for the people who pay you. Writers under the old system wrote to please publishers; finally we had a shot at writing to please readers. I'd hate to go to writing to please advertisers.

While I agree with all the other posts here by indie authors that they are still making a good living at those cheaper prices - and they don't have the overhead of the traditional presses - I still am waiting for the day when indies and traditional go head to head - i.e. same price point (hopefully indies going up but if it means traditional going down so be it). When both are similarly priced AND making similar number of sales. Then the lines will truly be erased between the two. For now...indies HAVE to offer lower prices to make the same number of sales - and I'm waiting for this milestone to fall for there to be a true "level" field.

I, too, am an unknown author and I released my novel, Dead Spell, at the end of February for $2.99. I had something like 3 sales and when that went on for a week, I panicked.

I dropped Dead Spell's price to 99 cents hoping to pick up momentum. In the last 16 days, I sold 36 copies. I still can barely afford a Starbucks coffee on the lower royalty rate, but I have a day job so don't cry for me, Argentina.

What the 99 cents price point DID do for me was a)get me readers and b)get me reviews. I have seven 5-star ratings on Goodreads, 5 great reviews. Three of those reviews are cross-posted to Amazon which makes my product a little more enticing for when I put it back up to $2.99 which will be as soon as print copies are available.

I'm not a fan of the 99 cents price point, especially if you have only one book out at the time. To me, it under-values good work and it's just another dollar store sale.

As a consumer, I feel like I'm cheating authors by paying only 99 cents because I know how hard being a writer is. I also agree with the race to the bottom camp. That argument makes good sense.

Anonymous, you're assuming in your calculations that the Trad author has gotten an advance that will "earn out," and thus allow him to actually reap that kind of money.

You're also forgetting that the author shares that piddling 25% with his agent. His actual percentage is much lower.

Finally, you're assuming that the Trad author's title will remain an ebook bestseller at that high price level for a full year. Experience suggests not. On the other hand, sales for indie ebooks at lower price levels have a much longer tail. "The List" is two years old, from what Joe's said somewhere. Amanda Hocking's e-titles were first published a year ago, and are still earning. Etc.

Ask yourself how many of the Trad titles on the bestseller list will still be there at those prices in another 2-4 months.

We can't assume all authors get 14.9% and will continue to do so in the future. And I don't know why you say it's harder to break into the top 100 as a traditionally published author.

You found it easier to gain success as an indie, but most reading this blog probably won't. Yes, there are many more hoops to jump through with legacy publishing, but the ultimate hoop that everyone has to jump through is the marketplace. The reader is the ultimate gatekeeper and determines who gets into and stays in the top 100. The ones that are there are the ones people want to read (for whatever reason.)

I think Joe, Amanda, and some others are fortunate (though fortune favors the prepared) to be getting in on the ground floor and establishing their brands early on. It's going to be much more difficult later on.

Seems like this was a good experiment. Though I have to echo Phil's question, if you were starting fresh would you launch at $.99 or $2.99. I have a novel almost ready for publication and a number of short stories. If I can get enough together to get some art for the short stories I'm think about putting them up at $.99 as well and possibly put some collections of stories up at $2.99.

@Robin: I still am waiting for the day when indies and traditional go head to head - i.e. same price point (hopefully indies going up but if it means traditional going down so be it)."

The prisoner's dilemma Tells us that indie authors will discount to get into the top 100. The chances among 10,000 authors that a few hundred will not break ranks is almost zero.

Big6 ublishers cannot afford to drop down to indie prices. They simply have fixed costs that are too high to survive.

There is a reason the big6 tried to 'price out' ebooks in 2010. Heck, they still over-price ebooks to support print books. The value of 'trapped shelf space' is worth a fortune to publishers. Even if it is just that pallet of books at a big box to remind a customer to buy a certain title/author.

Once ebooks hit greater than 20% of the market, the economics of book selling change. You've blogged pbook sales trends.

The 'unintended consequences' of the agency model are... interesting. :) As Joe alluded to, once the publishing machine starts to break down, there will be opportunity for $2.99 indie authors in the top 100. :)

I don't understand why people think it's a big mistake for Joe to make a change. He's got many books and is making a killing even without The List. What Joe is doing is trying to experiment until he finds the right strategy to maximize income and sales. He's willing to sacrifice some short term profits to find the sweet spot for various books. In the long run, he'll be better off than if he just sat on whatever seemed to be working at the moment.

Of course, it would be far riskier for someone with a single top 100 book, such as Victorine, to try this, but this is one of the advantages Joe has with his numerous titles and his name recognition.

I'm sorry, but this is madness. You have a book in the top 20 and you want to make a change? What if it cracks the top 10? You shouldn't mess with it period, because there is no guarantee you can get back here.

I just read an article about bestselling traditional author Jodi Picoult. Often criticized, evevn by NY Time book reviews, as a commercial and, frankly, poor quality writer. There are websites dedicated to how poorly written are her works.

Traditional publishing has garnered her a documented 14 million books sold. If every book sold for $10, and she got 15%, she’d have banked 21 million dollars off her books (not including the Cameron Diaz My Sister’s Keeper movie rights).

So, although there are certainly some “winners’ in e-publishing, I think before anyone completely turns tail on the traditional houses in 2011, they’d better at least submit to make sure they’re not the next Jodi Picoult.

So, although there are certainly some “winners’ in e-publishing, I think before anyone completely turns tail on the traditional houses in 2011, they’d better at least submit to make sure they’re not the next Jodi Picoult.

You're forgetting that she did not start publishing in 2011. The industry was completely different. If she were starting from scratch today, it might not make sense for her.

If we haven't seen indies make 21 million yet, I suspect it's only because ereader penetration has penetrated fully yet. But it keeps moving closer to that, not the other way around.

In addition to promotions, different price-points also work well for different products. I've got short stories up for $0.99 and a novelette up for $1.99 All are clearly labelled on the cover as to the length (that's important) and are selling well at these prices -- especially the novelette.

I'll be releasing a full-length novel soon (with ties into one of my short story worlds); I'll probably price it somewhere between $2.99-$4.99 -- which seems like a fair price for an ebook, and less than a trad paperback.

She isn't a bad writer, even from objective standards. She actually has some turns of phrase sometimes that are quite remarkably beautiful. There are times she moves from genre writer into literary writer. She's no Cormac McCarthy, no, but still. Granted, I haven't read much recent stuff of hers. Maybe it went downhill? But I can't imagine someone calling her a "bad writer." Really?

That's what you're not considering. How much time (and time = money) is an author supposed to waste waiting, from the point where his novel is finished, to its (increasingly unlikely) pub date by some Legacy Publisher? Joe has already blogged on this, and I invite you and others to read or re-read it. His considerations are not just persuasive; they're unassailable.

Look: If I self-publish, I have a 100% guarantee of my novel being available for sale within weeks of when it's finished. I could start earning money immediately, and go on to write something else.

So, how much would I trade away -- in time, money, and creative independence -- if I must go through the 2-3 year ordeal to find an agent, for her to find a publisher, and for the publisher to finally get around to putting my book into print? Even assuming that this all works out (which is increasingly unlikely), the most common financial reward will be a $5k advance for all that work and waiting.

"If we haven't seen indies make 21 million yet, I suspect it's only because ereader penetration has penetrated fully yet. But it keeps moving closer to that, not the other way around."

I doubt e-book indies will ever see those numbers, especially the .99 cent ones. I mean, you'd have to sell 21 million of them!

E-readers will ultimately take over, but we also have to factor in the exponential growth of the number of book choices available in the future. That will dilute the available pool of money that'll be spread around.

I also think books will become shorter, more like how they used to may, and spend less time on the top 100 list as they make way for new ones.

As iTunes may have been the final nail in the coffin for the millionaire rock star, so Amazon and the e-reader revolution may spell the end of rock star authors like King and Patterson.

@Coolkayaker1" I just read an article about bestselling traditional author Jodi Picoult. Often criticized, evevn by NY Time book reviews, as a commercial and, frankly, poor quality writer. There are websites dedicated to how poorly written are her works."

LOL! I had not heard that. But I guess I'm not too surprised, human nature being what it is.

There have always been reviewers who are snobbier-than-thou. But I have to marvel at the notion that some would have the drive to dedicate a website to such a topic. What do they get out of it? Seriously.

Just to set the record straight, my mother is Anita Gordon, who has published 6 novels traditionally, 3 under the pseudonym Kathleen Kirkwood. And no, not everyone can be the next Nora Roberts, either; however, I am urging her to publish her work in e-book format, though she's wary about the format.

One thing that you fail to mention about traditional publishing is that can take years to get your rights back. I've seen this happen firsthand. Eventually (and reluctantly) they give them back. Thankfully, my mother now has all her rights. Truly, what is she waiting for? Good question, that's why I pointed her to J.A. Konrath's blog.

@S.E. Gordon:"One thing that you fail to mention about traditional publishing is that can take years to get your rights back."

New contracts are not reverting.

Read, IIRC clause 6, of MacMillian's new contracts. They gain derivative rights! I'll let the authors discuss... It only makes your point, there is no longer a contest.

What is also in favor of indie publishing is the bandwidth. How many big6 authors are allowed to publish multiple books per year? If an indie author can write a book, there is nothing stopping it from hitting the market. :)

e.g., I *love* Nathan Lowell's books. If they were only available at 1 per year... that would be one sale per year. He's 'cranking up' to 3 per year. :) That is 3 sales to me. ;)

Some authors have put their career backlist onto Kindle (or are in the process). Talk about a pension fund. :)

All evidence is that ebooks are expanding the book market... So the armagedon some worry about, I just don't see happening. Well, not for 'low overhead' operations. ;)

Hi SE Gordon: Your mother sounds like a fine writer and has had some success in traditional publishing, but not perhaps what she expects or deserves. I can see why she’d turn to e-publishing. She should.

That said, I have followed this blog closely, and am truly unbiased because I’m an avid and logical reader, not a writer. Although Joe’s blog is hugely informative and Joe is as candid as the day is long, this blog is quite provincial in its scope.Certainly e-books will rule (I know, I bought a Kindle 1 when they were $400). And self e-publishing can make money—in a few cases, serious money.

But, a broader perspective from other news stories, bestseller lists, literary awards, and blogs, still shows a strong bias for traditional publishers. I am not convinced that a new author should avoid traditional publishing. For those few that “make it” there, the potential to earn (like Jodi Picoult or your example, Nora Roberts) a truly mind-numbing amount of cash, in an environment that still has a strong hold on advertising and Hollywood, is hard to pass up. That amount of cash is not yet available to e-self publishing.

For those that have had a falling out with traditional publishers, or who have not been accepted for any reason, self-publishing seems to be a new answer to sticking the manuscript in the desk drawer. And that, as Joe states, is a good thing for us readers

I doubt e-book indies will ever see those numbers, especially the .99 cent ones. I mean, you'd have to sell 21 million of them!

Actually, at $.99, you only earn .35 on the dollar, so you'd have to sell 60 million books to earn 21 million. However, if you had 10 books and sold each one for $2.99 at 70%, you'd only need to sell one million of each book. I am sure we will see some authors do that in the next few years. Probably we will read about them on this blog

ONLY a million times ten? Hmmm. How many people reading this blog are happy to be selling 3-4 books a day? And though e-books will have a larger percentage of the big pie (maybe even most of the pie), there will be many more writers diluting the available money pool, competing for the reader's dollar (or $2.99). If there's one top supernatural romance writer today, tomorrow there will be a hundred more. Even with e-books at 100% of the market, I'm not sure we'll see those numbers from indies. And all of this assumes readership increases rather than decreases. People might be in love with their kindle today because it's the newest and coolest thing, but what about tomorrow?

Remember a few months ago when everyone was saying you had to have your own blog--platform, platform, platform--and then a few weeks ago everyone was saying how blogs aren't really the thing anymore, and now it's all about tweets. What's it gonna be next week, or hell--five minutes from now?

Maybe everyone shouldn't jump off the good ship Legacy just yet and rush to self-publish the 200,000 word monster they finished before lunch.

"anonymous" said:> As iTunes may have been > the final nail in the coffin > for the millionaire rock star, > so Amazon and the > e-reader revolution may > spell the end of > rock star authors > like King and Patterson.

great! let's kill _all_ the stars!

it's far better for the ecosystemif more writers make a _living_and fewer writers make a killing.

"People might be in love with their kindle today because it's the newest and coolest thing, but what about tomorrow? "

Reading has been popular for a couple thousand years. Unless we get nuked to oblivion and go back to oral story-telling I don't think there's a problem.

The kindle, nook, or generic ereader device will be around for many years to come. No worries. As long as people love to read we'll need writers to quench the thirst.

The argument about where more money can be made -- in self-pubbing ebooks or in legacy publishing -- means nothing to me. I was rejected by big publishing and I'm making thousands a month on Kindle book sales. Am I worried about missing the $21 million? Do I think I'm Jodi Piccoult?

Not even close! I know what I am (midlist), and I'm just happy to be paying my mortgage and my daughter's medical bills every month.

Big publishing can motor on without me (as they have been) and I'll swim in a smaller pond without them. It's working for me, and I figure if I hit it big like Hocking or Locke they'll all find me with their technology. After all, I'm still listed in the phone book.

Speaking of experiments, some here might recall a couple weeks ago I embarked on a "new cover" experiment to see how much of an impact a new cover makes on a product, everything else remaining the same.

I've also did some .99 cent price drops and there has been one surge of sales, but then it's backed off, which only confirms that .99 cents works for some books and not all, and feeds another theory that I'll be conducting an experiment of the end of this month.

I'm another person who came close with traditional publishing, but failed, and is now making 4 - 5,000 a month with the indie model. Of course, I've also got several books, and those several conceal several more that you'll never see where I learned how to write.

There are a fair number of writers on these forums with the attitude of, "My first book will be done at the end of the week. I'm going to make a KILLING!!!!"

They might. Some writers produce great first novels and achieve instant success. Most do not.

That's awesome. awesome. awesome. Definitely a great "study" for young chaps like myself who want to know everything there is to know about self-pubbing i.e. pricing, before I do it. I'm considering pricing my first novel at .99 cents but I'm not sure. Hm...

There's another unintended aspect of this experiment that may come into play. Kobo lowered the price of The List to 99 cents to match Amazon's price.

Even though Amazon is at $2.99 again, it may spot the Kobo price and lower it to 99 cents again to match it. If so, Amazon would still pay me 35% of $2.99, which is $1.05. Meaning they'd lose money on each sale. But they've done that before.

You know, I keep seeing things like this--but what if you're the next Jodi Picoult? what if you're the next Stephen Kind? what if you're the next Danielle Steele?

Guess what? If you sell a gazillion copies of your indie e-books, traditional publishers will be happy to work with you!

And isn't the problem with traditional publishing that it works for the writer ONLY if you're some huge bestseller? As a reader, I certainly don't limit myself to the bestseller list, and I certainly don't think it's the best source of quality literature. It's a lot more exciting to me that people who are less commercial can potentially make a living self-publishing. That means something.

Wouldn't Amazon pay you 70% of 2.99? When you raised the price back to 2.99, you would have increased your royalty level.

That would mean you made make roughly 2.04 (depending on the size of file and delivery charge).

Also, Joe, do you still have that Overdrive post in the works? I tried to look into that starting with my local library, but they had no idea how things work on the back end with Overdrive. I figured you would be the expert.

One more thing while I'm asking questions...did you ever hear back about the discrepancy between the Amazon website product description and the Kindle product description in reference to the lack of paragraph breaks in some people's Kindle descriptions? (You and I had e-mailed about that a while back.) I went back and forth with Amazon support several times and never got an answer out of them.

Matthew W. GrantSex, Sin & Scandal In A Small New England Town...Discover The SECRETS OF SLATERS FALLS (currently just .99)

There are a fair number of writers on these forums with the attitude of, "My first book will be done at the end of the week. I'm going to make a KILLING!!!!"

They might. Some writers produce great first novels and achieve instant success. Most do not.

That's a very good point, Michael. Most of us have to spend years honing our craft before we start producing work of publishable quality. The argument that novelists can now earn while they learn (like the pulp writers of yesteryear) is flawed, I think. As a reader, I'm not too keen on paying anyone's way through "college." If I buy something that turns out to be crap (even at $.99), I'm not likely to give that author a second chance. Life's too short to waste time on bad fiction.

Still holding at #23. I was one of the ones who thought you would make more money at 2.99, but I still guessed you'd drop a few places every hour until you settled at about 300-400 ranking. I was certainly not expecting that you'd hold your exact same ranking at 2.99.

It makes me awfully tempted to see if I can still sell 175 copies of The Righteous per day if I raise the price to 2.99. Then again, I don't have as much leeway to experiment and the 99 cent book is helping the sequel to sell a very respectable number of copies per day at a higher price.

joe said:> Even though Amazon > is at $2.99 again, it may > spot the Kobo price and > lower it to 99 cents again > to match it. If so, Amazon > would still pay me 35% of > $2.99, which is $1.05.

that's not how i read it...

amazon will pay 70% of thesales price, which would be70% of $.99. which would bea nice way to get 70% on a$.99 book, which would besweet. except most peopleobserve that amazon will_not_ match such a price,likely for that very reason.

> If I had to guess, I'd say > The List will earn more from > now until the end of March > than it did for the first 16 days > of March.> Place your bets...

i was unsure how to explainyour course of action, but i do believe that this clears upthe ambiguity of the situation.

i'd bet you are _correct_...

i would also bet that thingsare a bit more complicatedthan that, in the long run...

I suspect my results are more typical, though. Since March 1 I've been selling 3-4 books a day at $.99. At this rate it will take years before my earnings equal even the minimal advance I might have gotten from a traditional publisher.

I suspect my results are more typical, though. Since March 1 I've been selling 3-4 books a day at $.99. At this rate it will take years before my earnings equal even the minimal advance I might have gotten from a traditional publisher.

On the other hand, I've sold over 6,000 books since my first book went live on January 21. I did labor in obscurity for over 20 years, however, before I hit that point.

Very interesting to see that kind of quick response. For Joe's books, we're seeing some fairly strong price sensitivity of demand. Good to know and makes sales easier to model.

I would anticipate that alot of the ebook buyers are new customers for Joe (just a guess). If that is the case, then the 99 cent strategy clearly helps build market share and a ready audience for new works. That could mean even faster adoption of new ebooks in the future.

I am an unknown indie and have dropped my price on four distribution channels from $2.99 to $0.99 at the beginning of the month. So far, I have sold as many books month to date as I have in my "average" month since releasing Lie Merchants in November 2010. What's average? Yeah, well...it is only seven books per month. I don't mind divulging my pitiful sales numbers, embarassing as they may be.

January was my best month and if my March run rate continues, I'll be about even with January. That is not enough for me to say that lowering prices to 99 cents was the best move for me, because I will make much less profit at the lower royalty rate.

Why haven't I experienced the same kind of response as Joe? Probably several reasons: (1) He's a better writer, (2) he has more books for sale, (3) my topic is somewhat controversial and (4) my cover art needs improvement. Those are all things that can be fixed and I am in this for the long haul (working on sequel to Lie Merchants now).

Thanks to Joe and all the other participants, at least I don't feel like I am out here alone off the reservation! Appreciate the sharing of experiences and data.

The arguments for time value of money is moot when we are speaking of millions of dollars. It’s a delay at the beginning, with first book, but then a pattern of publishing and writing is set and it’s a non-issue. Same with lost book rights—Barbra Kingsolver and Joyce Carole Oates don’t lose a ton of sleep over old boom rights, just so long as the delivery truck keeps backing up to the castle with their royalty checks.

Plenty of modern authors are making it big—huge, actually—in publishing recently: Emma Donoghue (“Room”), Sara Gruen (“Water For Elephants”) and Karen Russel (Swamplandia!”) to name a few. Kathryn Stockett (“The Help”) was unheard of before her 2009 book, which spent over 100 weeks on the NY Times Bestseller list and is soon to be a movie. Who would pass up the potential for success of these modern female authors.

To Mary Sisson's point, the next Jodi Picoult has not come from the e-world yet.

I think traditional publishing, even in 2011, holds the trump card for excellent authors who are “allowed into the inner sanctum” –sure, there’s luck involved, too, and if you don’t get in then it might not be the quality of the writing (although that’s it most of the time); maybe it’s just that the legacy publishers are ignorant asses and have it out for most to fail.

Large scale advertising, connections to Hollywood and potential giant success and notoriety are what you are paying for with reduced per copy royalties (not just for book covers and formatting, as other posts here would suggest).

Any new author would be amiss to not try traditional publishing in 2011-2012.

And, just as a follow-up comment, I am very happy to have gone down the self-publishing route. I am a compulsive entrepreneur to begin with and like the ability to control the message, do the marketing and experiment. Learn and repeat.

So true. Joe is partially successful (IMHO) because he's also painfully curious.

The legacy publishers are going to change, no doubt about it. But I don't know what they will morph into, exactly.

Perhaps we will eventually have genuine author service companies (rather than vanity presses) for authors who have real talent but don't want to do anything themselves. There are a few companies doing this already.

I think the academic publishers will survive the longest, but even then, I'm not so sure.

So true. Joe is partially successful (IMHO) because he's also painfully curious.

Ain't that the truth. The other thing that's unusual is how much he's willing to discuss the facts, instead of speaking in hints and innuendo. As in, "I made X dollars last year, selling X books, with a contract that was worded like this..."

Part of the reason writers have struggled is because they feel obliged to keep these things secret, to not make any noise, etc. Hat tip to Joe for ignoring that particular unspoken rule, not just now, when he's independent, but when he had a traditional contract, as well.

"Just wondering if there's any data from first time self-publishing authors out there about how their novels are doing, how long it took them for sales to pick up, what worked for them, etc?"

There are regular threads over in the Writer's Cafe part of Kindle Boards where some indies share that kind of info. It's not scientific and there aren't that many who participate, but it might give you an idea.

I think there's a lot of understandable fascination with those having big successes as indies, and then some attention always called to those who can't pay some monthly bill with what their sales bring. However, I suspect there are just as many of us in the unremarkable middle, making a modest living or welcome supplement to other income and smiling a lot.

I did the same type of experiment. During the month of October I gave a Halloween special discount, all 8 of my elusive clue titles for .99. It worked for me. I sold lots and then the next month I went to 2.99. Readers who bought at .99 were hooked on the series and continue to buy at 2.99. I'll have four new titles to release in the next couple of months. I plan to play around with the prices.

Ellen, you're being modest. I bought your Rottie book after seeing your fantastic reviews and reading a great sample and it's on my TBR list, waiting my upcoming vacation. The only thing stopping you, IMO, is that you need to get some more books written and published.

However, I suspect there are just as many of us in the unremarkable middle, making a modest living or welcome supplement to other income and smiling a lot.

You know Ellen, thats not a bad place to be. I have no problems aspiring to the middle. You'll still be miles ahead of other authors. Who are wasting time sending in query letters and collecting rejection notices.

Joe I think you underestimate the power of this blog when it comes to your sales. There are many people who read this blog yet never leave any comments. I know I followed it for 6 months before I left one.

The problem with suddenly deciding to change the price on your ebook (or make any modification, edit, or other change) on the Kindle DTP platform is that the ebook is no longer "Live" but back to "In Review" status. Doesn't that effect sales between when changes are submitted to when the ebook is actually "changed" on the Amazon Kindle site?

I posted this elsewhere, but since a lot of authors engage in discussion here, I want to bring the discussion here too:

I want to note that the big sellers on Amazon Kindle and PubIt! are all genre fiction, especially paranormal romance. There's hardly ANY Literary Fiction on those bestseller lists as far as indie authored ebooks are concerned.That makes it pretty discouraging for literary authors.Luckily, I write both kinds of fiction... Just saying.

@ Michael - Thanks. I really enjoyed The Devil's Deep and hope you like my mystery.

@ T. J. - The openness of many indies about how they're doing helped me a lot to kind of find my place in the crowd. They've sure drummed into me how to keep that place (write more). Joe was the first one I found setting out his actual numbers and then others followed. Information people share here and in other forums still helps.

I believe genre fiction usually outsells literary fiction, regardless of medium. The usual remedy is to sneer at how shoddy genre fiction is. Throw in a few jibes at capitalism for added feel-good smugness.

Tara said:>>If we haven't seen indies make 21 million yet, I suspect it's only because ereader penetration has [not] penetrated fully yet. But it keeps moving closer to that, not the other way around.<<

If I understand this correctly, yes, I agree. Once the English-speaking, westernised middle classes in places like the Indian sub-continent, China and the Middle East supplement the western world's buying of ereaders, and the pipe through Amazon et al remains open, pretty much the sky is the limit.

Coolkayaker1 said...For those that have had a falling out with traditional publishers, or who have not been accepted for any reason, self-publishing seems to be a new answer to sticking the manuscript in the desk drawer.

I think that perception is antiquated. The whole "so you're not good enough for the big league so do this as an alternative." Was a view of self-publishing for years. But now, the financial $'s make it MUCH more lucrative to self-publish so it's not the "rejected" works going that way...it is authors who are trying to maximize control and profit.

wannabuy said...Big6 publishers cannot afford to drop down to indie prices. They simply have fixed costs that are too high to survive.

I usually agree with you but not on this point. Big6's overhead is not based on per book. If they sell 100,000 ebooks they have no more cost then if they sell 10,00 so yes they can lower to $0.99 - the only reason they are not is they don't wish to canablize their print sales which they have invested large capital outlays of cash and they can't afford to have them stay in warehouses.When ebooks totally dominate print (We aer stil only at 8% - 25% ratios atm)then they can and will use the $0.99 and beat indies.

Joe showed a 36x increase in sales and 6x in profit. Let's look at a book that they are making $5,000 a month on. They get (5,000 *.75)$3,750. If they decreae to $0.99 and make $30,000 they make ($22,500 which is $18,750 more money to pay for the same expenses they have when they are selling at the higher price.

I mentinoed before that Julianne MacLean had used the $0.99 to get into top 100 and raise to $2.99 to maximize profit before - so yes I predict the increase in price will produce a higher income - and...Originally the List was pretty stable at a rating of 1500 once it settles out - it will most certainly be below that - My guess is at least half (700ish) but could be in the mid 300's for a long time.

Considering the rise in the ebook market share, and how you have been consistently increasing your sales for the last several months, I think a million dollars is a very conservative estimate for your profits this year.

When ebooks totally dominate print (We aer stil only at 8% - 25% ratios atm)then they can and will use the $0.99 and beat indies.

Robin, I agree that the big6 ebook costs do not depend on volume, and they would take in more money at 0.99. But won't they still have so much expense in the form of excess staff and expensive real estate that they cannot match the royalty rates that authors can get elsewhere? If they also are forced down to $0.99, I cannot imagine that they could keep the biggest authors (at least those who are big due to talent, not just due to costly overpromotion) unless they do so at a loss, and when the biggest names go to self-publishing, (and assuming that the big6 give up on print once ebooks dominate) what do the big6 have left? I'm not sure they can compete at an equal price point. They would have to basically become author service companies, or lose their best writers, right? I think Michael got the best contract I've heard of, and maybe that could become more common, but still, it isn't clear to me that big6 has a place in the future.

Coolkayaker1 said... Robin. Reread what you've quoted from me and then how you interpreted it. You'll see the difference.

I'm not 100% clear what you mean. I think we are both saying the same thing which is not to let a manuscript languish in a drawer. My point is it that many are FOREGOING the submission process in lieu of more control and a bigger share so it's not JUST those that are rejected that should go indie.

Anonymouse said...If they also are forced down to $0.99, I cannot imagine that they could keep the biggest authors

There's no question that publishers can't match the royalty shares of going direct. But not all people WANT to "go it alone". I'm an entrepreneur. Ridan is my third business (the other two being software and marketing) so for me it’s easy to do. There will always be those that just want to write and turn it over to someone else. They will be willing to give up $’s to not have to worry about those things.

I think the role of publishing will change – publishers will be less about distribution (which will be a more level playing field) and more about promotion (marketing). In the past their marketing efforts have largely been to large chain book buyers at to increase distribution, but in the new world order I think they’ll be more concentrated on “gaining tribes” for authors.

So far there has not been a mass exodus from traditional publishing to self publishing – do I think its coming – yeah. I actually wish it would get some momentum as that would force the 25%/75% ebook royalty issue. Once enough authors walk BECAUSE OF THIS then the rates will change.

Joe -- Can you comment here or in a future blog about which genres seem to be doing the best? My hunch is that some do better than others, and that there is a younger demographic out there of early adopters who want one kind of fiction versus another.

Joe -- Can you comment here or in a future blog about which genres seem to be doing the best? My hunch is that some do better than others, and that there is a younger demographic out there of early adopters who want one kind of fiction versus another.

Derek Canyon has a post with pie chart that was based on some original work by Robin Sullivan. I can't say whether it is an accurate picture, but it might help answer you question.

Apologies if this is a duplicate post. I had a browser issue and couldn't tell whether my first attempt was accepted...

Milton asked:

Joe -- Can you comment here or in a future blog about which genres seem to be doing the best? My hunch is that some do better than others, and that there is a younger demographic out there of early adopters who want one kind of fiction versus another.

Derek Canyon has a post with pie chart that was based on some original work by Robin Sullivan. I can't say whether it is an accurate picture, but it might help answer you question.

Joe -- Can you comment here or in a future blog about which genres seem to be doing the best? My hunch is that some do better than others, and that there is a younger demographic out there of early adopters who want one kind of fiction versus another.

Derek Canyon has a post with pie chart that was based on some original work by Robin Sullivan. I can't say whether it is an accurate picture, but it might help answer you question.

Joe -- Can you comment here or in a future blog about which genres seem to be doing the best? My hunch is that some do better than others, and that there is a younger demographic out there of early adopters who want one kind of fiction versus another.

Derek Canyon has a post with pie chart that was based on some original work by Robin Sullivan. I can't say whether it is an accurate picture, but it might help answer you question.

Joe: Seconding bowerbird on Amazon-instigated price drops, I think you're wrong about the royalty effect if Amazon drops a 2.99 sale price to match a lower price elsewhere. I priced my story Sarah Palin: Vampire Hunter at $2.99. Amazon noticed it for $1.99 at B&N (in a slightly different version) and dropped their price to match. However, they are paying me 70% of $1.99 on each sale ($1.40 before 4 cent data charge), not 35%. When Amazon itself lowers the price below $2.99 they continue to honor the 70% rate. At least that is my experience with this title. Whether that would still hold with a drop to 99 cents I can't say.

Joe -- Can you comment here or in a future blog about which genres seem to be doing the best? My hunch is that some do better than others, and that there is a younger demographic out there of early adopters who want one kind of fiction versus another.

Derek Canyon has a post with a genre pie chart that was based on some original work by Robin Sullivan. It might help answer you question.

Joe -- Can you comment here or in a future blog about which genres seem to be doing the best? My hunch is that some do better than others, and that there is a younger demographic out there of early adopters who want one kind of fiction versus another.

Derek Canyon has a post with a genre pie chart that was based on some original work by Robin Sullivan. It might help answer you question.

Joe, I tried to post that last comment about 5 times before it showed up. I tried my google acct, OpenID, and my name/URL. I got that message that comments may not appear immediately, but I waited hours and nothing showed up. When I tried to post anonymously just now, it worked right away. That seems odd. Am I doing something wrong that you can see on your end?

well, at that rate, you shouldsurpass your $.99 proceedsfor the last month in 4 days.

that's the good news, for you.

the bad news, for everyone,is that now, lots of authorswill try to game the systemin a similar manner, meaningthat anything _not_ priced at $.99 has very little chanceof making the list at all, orstaying on the list if it does.

"When ebooks totally dominate print (We aer stil only at 8% - 25% ratios atm)then they can and will use the $0.99 and beat indies."

They are always going to have more overhead than indies, though, and indies can remain at $0.99 and be patient. The NY publishers can use it as a sale price, but not a long-term price.

What writer will be satisfied with a tiny cut of $0.35 profit per book sale -- at the current 25% royalty on the publisher's take of ebooks, that's all of $0.09. And then the writer gives the agent 15% of that. Writers will not agree to that, and if publishers force that on them they will self-publish.

I don't see $1 being a price NY publishers can live at.

And even if they do figure out how to keep some books at $1, so what? They get sales. That doesn't drive indies out of business. Writers like to write. Maybe they make less money, but I bet they keep on writing and keep on publishing.

@Robin: If they sell 100,000 ebooks they have no more cost then if they sell 10,00 so yes they can lower to $0.99 - the only reason they are not is they don't wish to canablize their print sales which they have invested large capital outlays of cash and they can't afford to have them stay in warehouses.When ebooks totally dominate print (We aer stil only at 8% - 25% ratios atm)then they can and will use the $0.99 and beat indies."

In the spirit of respectful disagreement... (For I too usually agree with you): I do not think that would allow the big6 enough total revenue from all their books to pay their fixed overhead costs (lease on the NY building, executives, large staffs, etc.).

For if one author was dropped to $0.99, it doesn't just compete with Indie/small pub, it also competes with other big6 books. Now, a bunch of $0.99 ebooks will grow the ebook market very quickly. This isn't a 'zero sum gain.' I still think in the end only the 'low cost providers' will thrive.

A staff of 1 to 3 producing ebooks can, once ebooks are more than half the market, earn an income at $0.99. I forget how many people were employed for each big 6 book, but it wasn't a small number (12 IIRC...). If it is a price war at $0.99, efficiency matters (as in books per employee per year).

Note: I see a substantial 'mid-list' market of ebooks selling for $2.99 to $6.99. But unless big publishers figure out how to cut costs, the big6 will be competing with their own authors backlists in that arena. Oh, and will indie/small pub too. ;)

I should have mentioned, I think the big6 currently have a HUGE advantage having their books in the window, at Cosco, etc. People see a novel and recall it when they purchase ebooks. Once that marketing advantage diminishes, I see the expenses that the big6 have built up supporting print pulling them down.

Business have a hard time 'shedding costs.' Once a high cost culture is in place, it is very tough to shake it off. It is the poor authors and small publishers who have had to adapt to a 'low cost culture.'

the bad news, for everyone,is that now, lots of authorswill try to game the systemin a similar manner, meaningthat anything _not_ priced at $.99 has very little chanceof making the list at all, orstaying on the list if it does.

Why is that bad news? I thought you advocated a $.99 price point (though not the difference in royalty rate on Amazon). I can see an advantage to readers if their favorite books periodically go on sale. Readers who are price sensitive can still snap up good stuff for cheap prices. Readers who are less price sensitive can get the books immediately if they are too impatient to wait for a sale.

Anna wrote: "Derek Canyon has a post with a genre pie chart that was based on some original work by Robin Sullivan..."

I saw that in a January post by Joe, but I am wondering about more pinpoint numbers. Canyon's chart has Thriller and Mystery at 12% each, but no sub genres. There is nothing in the chart about Erotica, which I suspect is huge. And his numbers (by his admission) don't include blockbuster writers like John Locke.

I wondering if someone else has drilled down into the numbers since December.

People have long wondered how the New York Times decides its bestsellers...and it's always declined to comment or clarify.but as so much information is available online and authors like yourself willing to share sales figures...their list isn't going to mean what it used to mean.

No, I'm afraid you cannot reference "youth" in your twenties. It's like a natural law of the universe or something.

Re: gaming the system at $0.99. Where in the world have you guys been? Pricing at $0.99 to get to the top and then changing your price to $2.99 has been around for months! (translated into ebook-months, ala "dog years" - that's like two years! ;) Sometimes it works. Sometimes it doesn't. There are still no guarantees that anything (even going "Free" if you have the opportunity) is going to make your book sell. Look at all the books that are free on Smashwords.

So "all the writers" who will "game the system" aren't going to actually change that system or the way it's currently working, because they're already doing it, and the cream is still rising to the top. Eventually, that's going to happen, if we let it.

If I'd been included on the pie chart (what is it with people excluding my genre everywhere? lol I'm on the list elsewhere - I think Joe added me because I wasn't active on KB at the time...) I would have been up there with HP Mallory and Victorine Lieske. 20K that month.

"I should have mentioned, I think the big6 currently have a HUGE advantage having their books in the window, at Cosco, etc. People see a novel and recall it when they purchase ebooks. Once that marketing advantage diminishes, I see the expenses that the big6 have built up supporting print pulling them down."

I've thought that too. It's a huge marketing advantage having a physical book in stores. It just gets seen more often, and some of those people who see it are ebook buyers.

The big box stores like Costco are going to be selling paper books for a long time. Those aren't going away anytime soon. The problem for publishers will be finding venues for their midlist offerings if a lot of bookstores close up.

And as ebook sales rise, it's hard to see book sales rising in bookstores as well. It's more likely they will decline. Look for bookstores to start selling lots of other things besides books to increase revenue, which in turn will result in reduced shelf space for books.

Here's an article in my local alternative weekly paper about what the remaining indie bookstores are doing to survive:

A very interesting and enlightening experiment. I'm intrigued both as an author (print and ebook) and as an accountant. My ebooks, Managing a Freelance Writing Business and Tax Preparation & Planning for Freelance Writers are nowhere near that price point, but I am working on a series of YA novels that I will experiment with those price points. Mega thanks for sharing your intell! Freelance Writing Ebooks

I might be throwing off that chart a bit, since I report on Kindleboards as "Ellen Fisher," but probably half my sales are actually erotic romance under a different name. Of course, erotic romance might be classified as either romance or erotica, but... *shrugs*

Erotica really rocked the B&N charts in February. I'd love to see a pie chart for that month including numbers from Selena Kitt, Bella Andre, and Tina Folsom. I have a feeling the erotic piece of pie would be really, really big... so to speak.

it might take another 9 days-- or more, who knows? --to drop out of the top-100,so it has made _boatloads_of cash after its price-raise.

and "the list" will do the same.

(and it's not like either will_stop_ making money afterthey fall out of the top-100.)

so this "strategy" does work,in the sense that it deliversa bunch of cash to a writer...

the unintended side-effect,however, is that it also ruinsthe usefulness of the enginethat does recommendations,and the value of the top-100.

readers depend on thosesystems to cull through themassive amount of e-booksbeing offered these days!

and every writer, includingkonrath and other authorswho are gaming the system,wants to -- _needs_ to! --_make_use_ of those samerecommendation systems,and thus depends on themto be healthy and work right.

that's how your work can be_found_, for crying out loud!

so gaming those systems islike shitting where you eat...

now, hopefully amazon willrealize that it, too, dependson having a healthy system,and it will make rules thatprevent any such "gaming".

in regard to the point thatauthors have been gamingthe system for months now,that might well be true, butwhen joe konrath uses a trick,his transparency means thata big bunch of people will beusing that trick from now on.

Dan: When Amazon itself lowers the price below $2.99 they continue to honor the 70% rate. At least that is my experience with this title. Whether that would still hold with a drop to 99 cents I can't say.

This is the most important question. To me, it seems like the holy grail of pricing to have a 99 cent book earning 70% royalty.

I will try to see if Amazon can do it on Dirty Parts of the Bible, by keeping the Nook price at 99 cents and then raising the Kindle price (hoping Amazon will then strike it down to 99 cents). It will take at least week (for the next Amazon sales report) to see if it works...

I'm sure bowerbird knew I meant no harm. I still don't agree, however (I think) that changing the price somehow accrues bad karma, or that Amazon should do something that encourages price stickiness. (I think it's much better to let authors experiment with price without feeling afraid of losing their ratings. Personally, such a penalty would make me never want to introduce a $.99 book, for fear of never being able to change it.)

It's not bad, at least from the consumer's point of view, to have turnover in the top 100 books. And from the authors point of view, I don't see why you should suddenly not deserve the good reviews of your book if the price changes. If reviewers think a book is "okay since it was $.99" they usually say so. Otherwise, if they liked it, I don't think they would tell people they liked it only at a certain price. Maybe I'm wrong, but that seems weird to me. You can read pbooks at a variety of prices too, including free from the library.

Yes, I'd think that in the terms writers agree to when publishing at Amazon, Amazon reserves the right to price-match, and if the price drops down into the 35% royalty rate, that is what Amazon will pay. It doesn't make sense otherwise.

If it happens and you get the 70% rate, great, but I'd put that down to a glitch rather than Amazon policy.

And frankly, the more indies try to game the system and get around Amazon's intentions, the more Amazon will tighten things up and, possibly, begin to pass on that expense to the self-publishers.

Hi! I've had two novel published and eight plays produced, but I stuck an unpublished novel on Kindle and it sold diddly squat. Victoria Strauss put me onto this blog. Great stuff! I'll have to read it and try to understand how to do this stuff. I've got seven other unpublished novels to go!! johnmckenzie.blogspot.com

i'm _glad_ that sam is openabout what he is doing, andi think joe has done writersa _tremendous_ service withhow transparent he has been.

so when i talk about matterslike "gaming the system" andrail against them, don't mistakeany of that as condemnation...

joe has done nothing "wrong",any more than a kid who takesapart an alarm-clock to seehow it works is doing "wrong",even if it ends with the thingnot working correctly when heputs it all back together again.

even when joe's heart is notcompletely pure, his openness buys him a lot of forgiveness...

just so we're all clear on that...

and i think sam should do theprice-matching experiment...

but he should also grok thatamazon is probably listening.i would be, if i were amazon.

***

mark said:> I'd think that in the terms > writers agree to when > publishing at Amazon, > Amazon reserves the right > to price-match, and > if the price drops down > into the 35% royalty rate, > that is what Amazon will pay

i woulda sworn that that's whatthose terms used to say, butwhen i checked just yesterday,when the subject came up here,i discovered that amazon pays70% on a price-matched bookwith a normal price of $2.99...

so now i am a bit confused...

because it's also the case thatamazon has a "favored nation"clause that prohibits you fromselling a book at a lower price_as_list_price_ at another site...

so i guess if you list a book atthe kobo site as $2.99, _but_kobo itself slashes the price,then amazon will still pay 70%if it _matches_the_price_...

which is what john is saying.

but john was not specific thatamazon _will_ actually matcha $.99 price on another site...

in the past, i recall reportsthat amazon would _not_price-match below $2.99...

so, again... more confusion.

so hey!, do the experiment!

the worst that can happen isamazon sandbags your book-- stops selling it completely.

No problem. I brought it up because your comment seemed a little 'short'.

But, hey, I'm Australian, I get things upside down.

@Hotboy:

John, read through Joe's blog and glean the info you need to get those unpublished books into the cash. Also go and read Robin Sullivan's blog (write2publish.blogspot.com) she's got some great stuff there too.